Previous by Date Index by Date
Threaded Index
Next by Date

Previous by Thread Next by Thread

Re: CCUMC Multimedia Guidelines

Feb. 10, 1997

In response to my earlier question of why library organizations are
opposing the Fair Use Guidelines for Educational Multimedia, Mary Jackson
has presented a clear and concise reply I would like to take this
oportunity to present some clarification of the guidelinesas they are
presented by Mary, and my perspective as a member both of CCUMC and of the
CONFU working group on multimedia guidelines.  Stan Diamond

>[MOD. NOTE:  This message from the ARL explains the reasons for various
>library and higher education associations to NOT endorse the CCUMC
>Multimedia Guidelines, in response to a reader's question posed here
>(Mary E. Jackson...)
>Educational Fair Use Guidelines for Multimedia:
>A Summary of Concerns
>February 6, 1997
>	In July, 1996 the Consortium of College and University Media
>Centers (CCUMC) completed a two-year process to develop fair use
>guidelines for the creation of multimedia projects by educators and
>students.  The guidelines, "Educational Fair Use Guidelines for
>Multimedia," seek to clarify what constitutes 'fair use' of copyrighted
>materials in an educational context.  This fact sheet summarizes the
>concerns of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) and other
>organizations that rejected the CCUMC guidelines as overly restrictive.
>	CCUMC developed the guidelines with representatives from
>educational organizations, library associations, and copyright proprietary
>groups.  Educational organizations and library association representatives
>were active participants and raised many of the concerns noted below in
>working group meetings.  In spite of many long discussions over the course
>of the development of the guidelines, it is the opinion of many in the
>educational community that the final guidelines did not address these
>concerns and, therefore, the guidelines do not maintain the balance
>between users and owners of copyrighted materials.

(Stan Diamond responds...)

It is interesting to note here that while there are a few organizations
(such as ALA and ARL) who publicly oppose the guidelines as "overly
restrictive", many of their members (and non-members) who are actually
engaged in creating multimedia or in assisting other faculty and students
in creating multimedia view the guidelines as not only useable, but
liberating and empowering. For these people the guidelines provide the
"bright line..." referred to in the CONFU interim report, which they can
use to easily find their way through the difficult terrain of fair use.

>(Mary E. Jackson...)
>	As of early 1997, several organizations have issued statements
>opposing the guidelines including the Association of Research Libraries,
>the American Library Association, the National Association of State
>University and Land Grant Colleges, and a coalition led by the National
>School Boards Association.  The concerns raised by these constituencies
>include several common themes:
>**	The guidelines define fair use by imposing strict and
>narrow portion limitations.  Three examples are cited:
>	**	10% or 3 minutes, whichever is less, of a motion media
>	**	10% or 30 seconds, whichever is less, of music
>	**	Retention of student projects for 2 years or less

(Stan Diamond responds...)

The actual wording of the guidelines with respect to retention of projects
by the students who created them reads as follows:

"3.1 Student Use:

Students may perform and display their own educational multimedia projects
created under Section 2 of these guidelines for educational uses in the
course for which they were created and may use them in their own portfolios
as examples of their academic work for later personal uses such as job and
graduate school interviews."

As you can see, virtually no limitations are placed on student retention
of the works they have created. 

Faculty as well have broad retention rights. Although they can only use
the projects for two years as actual instructional tools, the guidelines
provide the following virtually unlimited retention rights: 

"3.3 Educator Use for Peer Conferences:

Educators may perform or display their own multimedia projects created
under Section 2 of these guidelines in presentations to their peers, for
example, at workshops and conferences. 

3.4 Educator Use for Professional Portfolio

Educators may retain educational multimedia projects created under Section
2 of these guidelines in their personal portfolios for later personal uses
such as tenure review or job interviews." 

>(Mary E. Jackson...)
>** Recognizing that user rights are not unlimited, these portion
>limitations still unduly restrict instructional creativity and the
>development of in-depth multimedia applications for distance education
>** These strictly-articulated quantitative limitations may establish
>untenable precedents that may narrow the interpretation of fair use, and
>thus will not fully protect the public's fair use rights.

(Stan Diamond responds...)

The developers of all the Fair Use guidelines (Distance Ed., Digital
Imaging, and Multimedia) were similarly concerned that they not be broadly
interpreted to limit fair use in any way. Therefore the Uniform Preamble
which is part of each guideline document clearly states: 

"Nothing in these guidelines shall be construed to apply to the fair use
privilege in any context outside of educational and scholarly uses of
educational multimedia projects" (each preamble obviously addresses its
own issue). 

The first footnote of the preamble goes on to state, "*These Guidelines
shall not be read to supersede other preexisting education fair use
guidelines that deal with the Copyright Act of 1976.". 

>(Mary E. Jackson...)
>** The guidelines appear to make teachers and administrators legally
>responsible for the activities of students.

(Stan Diamond responds...)

I believe, and as a parent have followed the premise that when a child is
in school, the school, its teachers, and its administrators are
responsible for both the welfare and actions of the child in addition to
its education. This includes to responsibility to educate the whole child
and impart ethical values as well as facts and figures. In teaching a
child to play a sport, the school also teaches about the rules of the game
and the ethics of good sportsmanship. In teaching the child to create
multimedia materials, part of the teaching should concern itself with the
technological and instructional design issues and part around the ethical
and legal issues of copying, attribution, and copyright. 

>(Mary E. Jackson...)
>	The CCUMC multimedia guidelines were developed in a parallel, but
>separate, process from fair use guidelines being developed by the
>Conference on Fair Use (CONFU).  CCUMC encouraged CONFU participants to
>become involved in their process, and the CCUMC working group eventually
>became the CONFU educational multimedia working group.  CCUMC
>representatives made regular reports at CONFU plenary meetings.  At the
>November, 1996 plenary session, CONFU participants agreed to consider the
>CCUMC guidelines as a proposal for fair use guidelines for educational
>	If a sufficient number of CONFU participants endorse the
>guidelines by the final CONFU meeting scheduled for May, 1997, the CCUMC
>guidelines will be included in the CONFU final report as CONFU fair use
>guidelines for educational multimedia.

(Stan Diamond responds...)

While it would be nice to add the CONFU imprimatur to the multimedia
guidelines, it should be noted that they have been officially endorsed by
virtually the entire proprietary community (also known as those who might
sue you for infringement), an ever growing number of k-12 and higher ed. 
media and library organizations, as well as having passed a
non-legislative review by the subcommittee of the House Judiciary
Committee. (This report over the signatures of Carlos Morehead and
Patricia Schroeder included as part of the guidelines document on my web
page.) The guidelines therefore are ready for use now and are currently
being use by educators in both the K-12 community as well as higher ed. 

In conclusion, we must all remember that these are only guidelines. If
anyone feels that they have more freedom by applying the four principles
of fair use, they are certainly encouraged to do so. If the concept of
fair use is legislatively expanded at some future time, the guidelines may
become unnecessary.  Our only intention in creating the guidelines was to
assist educators by providing a clear, concise roadmap which they could
easily follow in creating their educational multimedia projects without
any fear of notice or reprisal by the copyright police. 

Stan Diamond, Manager         (814) 863-3100
Audio Visual Services         (814) 863-2574 (Fax)
Special Services Bldg         (800) 826-0132 Order line
1127 Fox Hill Rd,      
Univ. Park, PA 16803          HTTP://
© 1996, 1997 Yale University Library
Please read our Disclaimer
E-mail us with feedback